Highest performance Japanese-styled swords?

J

judge

Joined
Dec 20, 1999
Messages
584
Hello y´all,
I´d love to hear your opinions on this question: Who is producing the highest performance Japanese-styled blades?
If you could chose a maker to forge you a Katana meant for hard use, regardless of price or availability, which one would it be?
With performance, I mean stability, cutting ability, edge holding, balance etc. Simply the best battle sword, not the most valuable antique or completely traditional Japanese blade.
I think I´d vote for a Howard Clark L6 katana, or a Wally Hayes cable damascus.

------------------
"Peace is not without conflict; it is the ability to cope with conflict" - Leo Giron
www.messerforum.net - the premier German language knife-related web board
 
I second the motion for a Howard Clark L-6 followed by a Michael Bell forged cable katana.
 
Seb, you gotta shell out 2000 minimum, more towards 3000 USD for a decent blade by mentioned makers, don´t know exact figures. If I had the bucks, I´d go for it. Well, maybe in the future...

------------------
"Peace is not without conflict; it is the ability to cope with conflict" - Leo Giron
www.messerforum.net - the premier German language knife-related web board
 
Basically you mean you want the most abusable sword out there.

People always try to mask the term "abusability" with 'battle-worthiness' or 'high performance' it seems. But anyway...

I agree, Howard Clark's L6 offerings offer the highest level of ability, particularly for serious martial artists who would like to learn test cutting and need something forgiving for awful cuts.

Michael Bell's martial artist-offerings are up there a ways, very high-end stuff, very good cutting, superb edge retention.

So I agree with the others.

Michael Bell's cable-welded swords (lowest priced ones of his) are in the $5000-6000 range usually

You can get Howard's offerings through Bugei fully mounted and polished, or you could get an unfinished blade from Howard and find folks to suit it up and polish it for you. Price range will be $2500 to $5000, depending on what you want.
 
Thanks for the replies so far.
Robert, why do people in your opinion mask the term "abusability" with "high performance"? Does "normal use" (whatever this is for a sword) not need "high performance"? If I want a sword, it should be of the highest performance I could afford. If I got unlimited funds, I´d go for highest performance. How does this connect to abuse? Just curious.

------------------
"Peace is not without conflict; it is the ability to cope with conflict" - Leo Giron
www.messerforum.net - the premier German language knife-related web board

[This message has been edited by judge (edited 10-11-2000).]
 
I'm sure I'm one of the only people with this opinion, so I'm not looking to debate it with people, just expounding my own perspective ok?

Many of what I consider to be the "best swords" will take a set after sufficient torquing to the sides, they will take edge damage from being used to hack through concrete most likely...you will get a high speed kashira in your crotch if you try using it as a step-ladder since copper or shakudo habaki are not made to withstand that pressure at the machi, and so on.

To me, there's a lot of difference between performance and abusability. Performance should rest upon the shoulders of the swordsmen as well as the blade. The more "bashable" you make something, the less necessary proper technique becomes. I mean Howard's L6 offerings and Michael Bell's cable offerings are fine swords...without a doubt, I would take pleasure in owning and using one. However they would not be my first choices in a "using" sword.

I'd think that anyone who'd be willing to spend $3000-6000 on a sword should take its use a bit more seriously, but some people don't.

In any case, that's just how I feel personally.

Shinryû.
 
"it's your soap, you can wash anywhere you want, as fast, and as long as you want"
smile.gif


The L-6 stuff I make will take a lot of abuse, that was the whole point of making it in the first place. To be effective as a katana, one has only to have a sword, no special type, no special steel, not even a hamon. The skill of the wielder is vastly more important than the blade. I have seen cuts made in very large targets (by tameshigiri standards) with swords that were not even sharp, having a .040" flat on the edge. I have personally cut green wood up to 2" branches with swords that are not yet sharpened when I did it. Any sword shaped piece of steel will cut. How long it will cut, how easily it will bend, how good it looks, how nice it feels, all those things are more subtle and require more attention to detail on the part of the maker.

My stuff is good, Michael Bell's stuff is good, and there are many others out there making good swords too. It might boil down to how much you want to spend.

In terms of durability, if I had to stake my life on one, and only one sword, it would be one of the L-6 blades, only because there is very lttle that will damage one of them that falls under the heading of "reasonable use". I can bend them, and they will even break, but not cutting stuff that they should be used to cut. Remember, swords were designed and intended to cut people, not trees, not plate armor, and not other swords.
 
I once saw John MacEnroe(while he was at Stanford) beat one of their other top singles players(who shall remain nameless) with a frying pan in his hand. But, having done that, did MacEnroe then come out onto center court at Wimbledon the following year with a frying pan? No, he chose the best racquet for his style of play that he could find.

Clearly, the sword is no better than its wielder, but the better the sword, the less likely that it will be the cause of failure on the battlefield. I believe that Musashi himself, if given the choice between the performance of a traditional nihonto and that of a Clark L-6 or a Bell Cable Damascus Kat, would choose the Clark or the Bell to take into battle.

Swordsmiths in feudal Japan were clearly constrained by the materials and methods available to them, and especially by a closed society and culture that prevented them from experiencing(and learning from) the ongoing evolution of sword steels and manufacturing methods that was happening in the rest of the world. Given those constraints, those Japanese Smiths built the very best swords that they knew how. If alive today- and allowed to think and work outside the box of tradition- would they build different combat swords from today's ultra high performance steels? Of course they would.

Mario

------------------
Gaucho

Tuvo muy mala suerte...se callo en mi cuchillo.


 
I hear the "If they had it back then, they'd use it" thing a lot, and it could be a good point if it WAS a point.

See, Japanese swords developed using materials that were available being done to the best of the maker's ability. Sometimes steps in the wrong direction were made due to lack of resources (laminate constructions for example) and the sword in general was not perfect. But that's what they had, and they did a wonderful job with it. The sword arts developed hand-in-hand. Making the best with what they had, and compensating for drawbacks.

If they had near-indestructible blades at a given point in time, there's a whole plethora of stuff that could and probably would have changed.

And Japanese swords and swordsmanship is, at best, nostalgic. Guys like Howard make the best weapons they can, but it is still nostalgic. The Japanese sword had its era, and trying to change its form and use and design is not doing it justice.

And I know Howard is not doing it to make art swords or completely traditional stuff, but since I met him some time ago, I had the pleasure of seeing several of his swords. To me just about all of them falls within traditional style. Materials and that jazz aside. People focus too much on the damn materials. To me, I may focus too much on cross section and niku-dori. That's what I find important. It's variable still depending on what you're going to do with it, but I have some limits to that.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion, and nobody here is going to change mine. Well maybe Howard if he can follow through on that offer for some sushi some time back...if you are reading this dude, lemme know the next time you're up here in MN!
biggrin.gif


I don't expect to change anyone else's opinions either, just expressing mine.

Shinryû.
 
I'm going to throw another name in the mix just to make it interesting; Phill Hartsfield makes a pretty tough blade also, known to be pretty sharp and edge retention is awesome. He hasn't had one break yet.

Let me just say this I know nothing about swordsmanship or target cutting or the martial arts for that matter, but I do know that my Hartsfield knives stay sharper longer than any other knives I own custom or manufactured.

Toshishiro Obata's Hartsfield sword has been used extensively and has not had to be sharpened.

Just my humble opinion....
 
Oh Jeez I knew that name was going to come up eventually. I'm sure you guys have all seen my comments on the Criswell stuff, but if not basically I said that for all I know its as tough as nails but basically calling them a katana or a wak is a misnomer. Take that for the Hartsfield stuff and multiply it by a factor of two. As for being "a superb battle sword" I would have to ask just exactly how many battles have these things been in? They appear to be good cutting swords (although in the hands of someone like Obata a crowbar would appear to be a good cutting sword) but I don't recall hearing about any battles with them...
 
Triton does make a good point. Just when was the past time someone used a sword in battle? In Highlander 5? I think for practitioners of sword arts, cutting and tameshigiri is probably going to be the activity most engaged. Oh, and Obata sensei does use a Hartsfield katana.

[This message has been edited by DrRMJ (edited 10-16-2000).]
 
I was going to stay out of this, but.....

Yes, Obata uses a Hartsfield sword, sometimes. He also owns a Kobayashi that he is very proud of, and I am sure several others. At some point in time, he will also have one of mine, but that is not really the issue.

Who makes the "best" sword ? I have no idea, nor do I care, really. All I can do is go to the shop and make the best swords that *I can make*, and improve the quality and performance of my own product, and then let it go.

Who decides what is the best ? The customer, decides what is the best *for them*. That equation includes all sorts of criteria that may or may not enter my mind (or any other makers mind).

I bow deeply to Phil Hartsfield, he has my respect and admiration for being able to get the money he does for the sword he makes. As a craftsman, I am not all that impressed with the swords, and I wouldn't take a truckload of A-2 as a gift unless I could sell it to someone who wanted it. It IS tough steel when compared with all the other air-hardening alloys. It is NOT all that tough when compared to L-6 in comparable conditions, nor even simple steel like 1086 in comparable condition. Hartsfield katana are not unbreakable, trust me. Anything can be broken, it is simpy a matter of how easily, or whther or not it happnes in "normal use" for a Japanese styled sword that is tameshigiri. For most cutting, any kind of steel could be used and not break if it was done well, even most of the stainless steels if they werer heat treated appropriately for the application.

As for who makes the highest performance sword, I don't know, but I am trying, and so are several others. I am not afraid to say that whatever anyone elses sword will do, so will mine, and maybe even a little more, I don't know, I've never been able to destroy anyone elses work to find out. I have broken several of my own swords though, and it is difficult, which means they won't fail in "normal use".

The Japanese believe that it is better for them to bend than to break. To some degree, I agree with this, you don't want a chunk of sharp steel flying out into the crown of spectators at the tameshigiri tournament. However, I also believe that to be a good sword, they should not bend easily either. Striking balance is the key to this (and all of life as well).

I don't think there IS an answer to the question. Each maker does things in his own way, with the materials and methods that we know and like.
 
Mr. Clark,

It seems like P.T. Barnum had some saying about suckers and mintues...
smile.gif
I'm sure that Hartsfield's marketing is probably the envy of the industry since he is getting some truly remarkable prices for some truly unremarkable products. (All my opinion of course.)

Now about that A2, it appears my book might have been in error? So A2 isn't so tough?
 
it was not implied that Hartsfield's sword was the best, nor any other makers. All that was said was that it is a superb sword that cuts well. It also holds its edge well, as does a lot of other swords out there. This is the sword that I practice with and I humbly report that I have only had good results. It seems that Hartsfield's pricing always comes up as a topic of discussion. yes, they are probably pricey, but so are a lot of other swords and knives for that matter. Craftsmanship is all in the eye of the beholder. Why can Yoshindo Yoshihara command such high prices? Because that is what the market will pay. Same goes for Hartsfield. Some may say that the materials used in Hartsfield's blades don't warrant the high cost. Well, I just bought a Lexus for my wife. Do you think I think it is worth the money I paid for it? No, I think it is overpriced and is just a glorified Toyota. It is still made of metal and has 4 tires, but why is it so much more expensive? Because the market will pay it. Why does Emerson's custom knives command such prices. because the market will pay it.

These are the swords that I consider to be fine "battle swords":

Hartsfield's A2 Katana
Clarks's L6 Katana
Any Bugei offering, including Clark's custom blades
Bell's tameshigiri pieces
Nosyuiaido's Steel tameshigiri iaito

Please, let's not have another discussion about Hartsfield's pricing so Les Robertson can come in and voice his words of wisdom (again)!
 
DrRMJ,

My posts were not intended as an attack on you. You have a Hartsfield katana and have used it where I don't have one and am only going on looks, reports and what seems to me to be some amazing prices. If I have come across as opinionated or a jerk I apologize, I am certainly the former but I am desperately trying to avoid being the latter.
 
Triton...........NO! NO! NO! I did not take your comments as insulting in the least! Actually, I quite agree with you regarding "battle blades." I mean, in our "civilized" society today, where are you actually going to use a sword in battle? My only concern was that another discussion on swords was not going to focus on the pricing practices of Hartsfield, which has been a topic of many threads in the past. I have great respect for all forumites, regardless of what is written or stated. I consider it a priviledge to be able to recieve so much information and opinions on knife, sword, and cutlery in the forums and am very thankful for it. So...........no insult taken. People may disagree on subjects, and people may like one maker, knife, sword, steel, method, technique, style over another, but we are all members of the same community and share the same respect for one another.

Oh, and I agree to an extent on the "katana" nomenclature used by Hartsfield and many of the makers that make swords and call them by by this. Hartsfield, as well as several others make their swords by stock removal and not in the traditional method. So maybe they should be called a "sword" rather than "Katana." Two of my training partners practice tameshigiri with a Don Fogg katana and a sword by Barry Dawson, which are also not made in the traditional method. These swords share similar construction methods with cord-wrapped handles and such. Perhaps some practitioners may not accept the use of these blades due to the non-traditional construction; there are instructors that forbid their use, but then there are also instructors that don't mind their use. I agree. A fully mounted Yoshihara sword is beautiful, as is a Clark Katana; and they will cut. To me though, comparing a Hartsfield to a Clark is like comparing a Robert Loveless to a Jerry Fisk. They are different, yet share similarities. Both are knives, both command a price, both are great, both can cut. But what would you rather have and use? The choice is up to you.

DrRMJ

[This message has been edited by DrRMJ (edited 10-16-2000).]

[This message has been edited by DrRMJ (edited 10-16-2000).]

[This message has been edited by DrRMJ (edited 10-16-2000).]
 
Excellent. Glad that is all cleared up.

Right you are about maybe changing the nomenclature on those things from "katana" to sword. In my opinion the only reason the katana moniker was applied in the first place is because:

1)Mostly japanese sword arts are practiced these days
2)Hartsfield/Criswell want to sell swords to those who practice japanese sword arts
3)For japanese sword arts a katana sounds much better then "practically designed cutting sword"

Just my thoughts
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top